Abstract

Background: Growing public concern for animal welfare, advances in computerized simulation and economic barriers have drawn a critical eye to the use of live tissue training (LTT) in trauma skills acquisition. As a consequence, other simulation methods have replaced LTT, for example, in the Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) course. Owing to the lack of clear conclusions in the literature, we conducted a systematic review to determine the value of LTT alone and in comparison to other simulation methods in trauma.

Methods: We performed a systematic review of the literature considering observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined LTT in trauma exclusively or compared with other simulation methods. Independently and in duplicate, we adjudicated studies for inclusion and data abstraction. We assessed the quality and risk of bias.

Results: Twelve studies met our inclusion criteria: 2 RCTs and 10 prospective cohort studies. Eight and 4 studies were performed in the military and in the civilian settings, respectively. Anesthetized swine were used in 8 studies and goats in 1. The cohort studies involved LTT alone. Different adjunctive training modalities were included: mannequins in 6 studies, cadavers in 2, computer simulation in 1, video presentations in 2 and wound moulage scenarios in 1. The overall methodological quality was moderate as per the Newcastle–Ottawa score (mean 6.0 ± 0, possible range 1–9). The 2 RCTs did not demonstrate adequate random sequence generation and allocation concealment.

Conclusion: There is limited evidence that other types of simulation are better than LTT. Data on training effects of LTT versus other simulations on outcomes are lacking.